Leica S 007 or Phase One XF?

[Paul J]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

http://www.reddotforum.com/content/2014/11/why-leica-is-staying-at-37-5mp-for-the-s-typ-007/

 

john

 

 

That is a sales pitch and in the context of a working professional it is mostly moot.

[hoppyman]

I think that the OP was talking about the outdoors shooting with his strobes. Out of the studio, it's useful to be able to balance the flash with the ambient light. The most problematic is the situation when you need to overpower the sun with the relatively less powerful modern battery strobes. In the studio you just close the windows and switch off the overhead lights, and you can shoot at 1/100 sec.

You are right. That wasn't clear to me from my first reading. I looked at the Original Poster's website now and the majority of the (excellent) images there were made on location.

[hoppyman]

"That is a sales pitch and in the context of a working professional it is mostly moot"

Paul J, to keep this in context, the OP is an amateur enthusiast  (as am I). I think that the comparison with the Nikon 800 series with similar pixel count is very relevant. I'm about 21,000 frames in with the S system now and, for me, the advantages of the S system over one with a 'full frame' 35mm sensor are compelling.

I would take a guess and say that the subset of working photographers that NEED more than 37MP is an even smaller one?
 

[hhn360]

You are right. That wasn't clear to me from my first reading. I looked at the Original Poster's website now and the majority of the (excellent) images there were made on location.

 

Thank you very much!

[Jeff S]

The latest XF has 100mp.....and costs a mere $48,000.  A start, I guess, for some.

 

Jeff

[Paul J]

"That is a sales pitch and in the context of a working professional it is mostly moot"

Paul J, to keep this in context, the OP is an amateur enthusiast  (as am I). I think that the comparison with the Nikon 800 series with similar pixel count is very relevant. I'm about 21,000 frames in with the S system now and, for me, the advantages of the S system over one with a 'full frame' 35mm sensor are compelling.

 

I would take a guess and say that the subset of working photographers that NEED more than 37MP is an even smaller one?

Relatively small subset, yes, but certainly profitable, and seemingly important on a marketing level and on a level that was and is accessible to Leica. It does seems strange to me they were once competitive on this front and have let their captive audience slip. It also seem obvious that their flagship camera is now relatively under equipped and I suggest limiting the rest of their range. Medium Format is needed largely for resolution and Leica have not addressed an upgrade in this regard since 2009 and now they face the situation of resolution being competed against with other systems at a fraction of the cost. We're not going to see another for at least 3-4 years. This is my constant frustration with Leica - Exceptionally good designs which are mostly behind the curve, putting them outside the reach of what I need, rather than want. Of corse, they will argue otherwise with their sales pitches.

 

Like I said, if 37MP was something I could work with I would take the S, over my convoluted and at times, frustrating Hasselblad anyday. In some key areas, I think the S is far better system. But the IQ and flexibility of my Phase One is a stopper and that is what I need over and above the benefits of the S and I put up with it and compromise because I need to.

[tom0511]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I guess it really depends on the needs:

-Are 36 MP enough? (more enough for me but you mention you are concerned it could be too few for you)

-do you prefer 2:3 or another side-ratio

-do you benefit from a good weather sealing?

-I have no idea how fast and accurate the AF of latest phase cameras works, I find AF and speed of the S pretty fast for a medium format camera.

-it also looks like you benefit from 1/1600 vs 1/1000

-which body you prefer in regards of handling

-which system offers the focal length you need with central shutter?

[hoppyman]

hhn360 this really sounds like you want the extra capabilities that the Phase One system and want us to agree  
If you NEED those extra capabilities and you are willing to pay for them then you already have your decision!

There are several S system users of course in this conversation but none with the Phase One system?
Its not often that you can say this but the S bodies at least are actually cheap in comparison (to the very high MP count backs at least)!

I think that the S system has several differences in comparison to other systems with a larger than 24x36 sensor. Going their own way I think. For me the 37MP is more than sufficient and I prefer the 3:2 proportions of the format. The flash synch to 1/1000 is fine for me but then 99% of my use of the S system is in studio anyway. I don't need tilt/shift for example either. 99% of my photography with this system is for fashion and beauty etc .

 

The AF operation and speed is fine perhaps 95% of the time for me in studio although the alternate screen with split/image for manual focus offers the best precision of all.
 

On reliability, I shot 15000 frames with my S2 and now 6000 so far with my S (Typ 007) with zero problems. I'm sure that you have seen in the forum though that some people are reporting up to multiple AF problems with some lenses.

On the megapixel count, it might be useful to know that Peter Karbe (Leica lens genius) has said that the physical size of the sensor cannot be increased within the S body but also that the lenses already can out-resolve the current and next generation of sensors. What that may mean for the next generation S is only speculation. To that we might add slightly better informed speculation from info hinted at in this forum regarding an EVF in the next S.

Good luck with your decision. As a parting line, for learning the interface especially maybe leave the 810 at home next time and see what the SL can do for you 

[Jon Warwick]

There was also this interview a while back about some of the thinking behind the S that i found interesting ....... http://www.forbes.com/sites/marcbabej/2013/05/08/how-leica-camera-is-reinventing-the-medium-format-market-on-its-own-terms/#bfbe2152fb32

[hhn360]

hhn360 this really sounds like you want the extra capabilities that the Phase One system and want us to agree  

If you NEED those extra capabilities and you are willing to pay for them then you already have your decision!

There are several S system users of course in this conversation but none with the Phase One system?

Its not often that you can say this but the S bodies at least are actually cheap in comparison (to the very high MP count backs at least)!

 

I think that the S system has several differences in comparison to other systems with a larger than 24x36 sensor. Going their own way I think. For me the 37MP is more than sufficient and I prefer the 3:2 proportions of the format. The flash synch to 1/1000 is fine for me but then 99% of my use of the S system is in studio anyway. I don't need tilt/shift for example either. 99% of my photography with this system is for fashion and beauty etc .

 

The AF operation and speed is fine perhaps 95% of the time for me in studio although the alternate screen with split/image for manual focus offers the best precision of all.

 

On reliability, I shot 15000 frames with my S2 and now 6000 so far with my S (Typ 007) with zero problems. I'm sure that you have seen in the forum though that some people are reporting up to multiple AF problems with some lenses.

 

On the megapixel count, it might be useful to know that Peter Karbe (Leica lens genius) has said that the physical size of the sensor cannot be increased within the S body but also that the lenses already can out-resolve the current and next generation of sensors. What that may mean for the next generation S is only speculation. To that we might add slightly better informed speculation from info hinted at in this forum regarding an EVF in the next S.

 

Good luck with your decision. As a parting line, for learning the interface especially maybe leave the 810 at home next time and see what the SL can do for you 

 

 

Thank you very much for your comments!

 

My most important considerations in terms of priority are (1) image quality, (2) handling/user experience, (3) reliability, (4) after sales support, (5) system upgradeability.  

 

I think the S is superior in (2) and has better lenses.  I think Phase One wins in (1), (4), (5).  I already use the SL extensively for personal photography and love its handling.  I also used to own the M9 and M240 and have a number of M lenses so obviously love Leica.  But you are right, I'm leaning more towards Phase One, unless someone really convinces me otherwise (which is why I'm asking this forum).

[mjrp]

Morning

 

I have a take on this decision as I have been an S shooter for a few years, 006 and 007 and my new XF body arrived a couple of days ago. They are very different camera systems, I changed to Phase and bought a IQ260 with a tech cam and 3 Rodenstock lenses because I won a contract to shoot industrial interiors and with the best will in the world, the S is not the camera for that, a tech cam with shift and tilt is perfect kit for the job. Wanting to keep some consistency with the files I bought a XF to use the IQ260 back for business portraits and more standard work.

 

I am a massive fan of the S, it is the best camera I have every used and that view has not changed now I own Phase, I will be back in to the S when I can afford too. Here are my views on comparisons bearing in mind I have yet to really push the XF. Build quality is nice on the XF but ergonomically, there is simply no competition, the S feels better in the hand and the lenses are a mile ahead in feel and operation, I prefer the S way of AF and override with the focussing ring at any time, with the Schneider lens you need to switch between af/mf on the lens. The lenses also feel much nicer, sure they are bulky for a lens but they just feel lovely, the Phase feels good but less solid. The performance from the 70mm on the S is way better than the 80mm on the Phase, loads of chromatic aberration wide open on the Schneider.

 

But, a camera has to do what you want it to, there's no getting away from that, I'm not so bothered about the extra resolution, as a commercial photographer the S has never left me short on resolution but the advantage of being able to use the back on a tech camera is huge if you need it. If I was just shooting studio/location portraits then I would never have left the S. I am sure once I have used the XF more I will be happy with it, lets face it, either way we are using extremely high quality equipment and if we aren't producing great images then it's hard to blame the camera!

 

Good luck with your choice.

 

Mat

 

 

[Jon Warwick]

I have a take on this decision as I have been an S shooter for a few years, 006 and 007 and my new XF body arrived a couple of days ago. They are very different camera systems, I changed to Phase and bought a IQ260 with a tech cam and 3 Rodenstock lenses because I won a contract to shoot industrial interiors and with the best will in the world, the S is not the camera for that, a tech cam with shift and tilt is perfect kit for the job. Wanting to keep some consistency with the files I bought a XF to use the IQ260 back for business portraits and more standard work.

 

Firstly, congrats on the contract.

Secondly, I'd really appreciate your feel on the following -- I am a 35mm FF user (M240).  I've tested an S, and every time I look at its files on screen or printed (up to 50" wide at 300dpi on an inkjet) my immediate reaction is "wow, the S files are so much better than the M240".

With the S at large print sizes, I see crisper and "more immediate" details; far fewer lens aberrations; much smoother and less digitised look; files that resample more happily for huge prints; and especially i see much more 3D depth and feel I'm walking into the S prints.  It's almost as though a piece of plastic sheeting is in front of the M240 lens, but has been removed on the S!

I assume my constant response to preferring S files is due to (i) the S lenses are a clear step-up in image quality over M ones, and were designed specifically for a digital sensor (ie, the whole S chain was designed from the ground up as a digital system); (ii) larger sensor than 35mm FF; (iii) higher bit files; (iv) more megapixels.

So my question -- when you use the IQ260, and if you resample to a big print size -- do you think "wow, the IQ260 (with its higher megapixel count) is clearly different in image quality compared to the S" ...... or are the differences of IQ260 vs. S potentially much more subtle compared to my M240 vs. S response, given the S displays a lot of those typical MFD benefits anyway, just with fewer megapixels?

Many thanks.

[tom0511]

Thank you very much for your comments!

 

My most important considerations in terms of priority are (1) image quality, (2) handling/user experience, (3) reliability, (4) after sales support, (5) system upgradeability.  

 

I think the S is superior in (2) and has better lenses.  I think Phase One wins in (1), (4), (5).  I already use the SL extensively for personal photography and love its handling.  I also used to own the M9 and M240 and have a number of M lenses so obviously love Leica.  But you are right, I'm leaning more towards Phase One, unless someone really convinces me otherwise (which is why I'm asking this forum).

 

If you like the SL one advantage of the S would be it handles very similar to you S. Also you could use the S 100mm occasionally on the SL if you want to, plus you could have the SL as a spare body in case you have a problem with the S.

Like Jon I ask myself how big the difference in IQ between the Phase and Leica. The sensor is one thing, the other thing are the lenses. I dont know if the Phase/Schneider lenses draw in the same way. I only have experience with the Leica lenses but love for example the fact that they are allready very very good wide open. I have no idea if Phase lenses beat Leica or the other way around, or if they render different or the same way, I only know I am quite happy with the S-lenses.

So the question is for me: is (1) image quality really better even at smaller and medium print sizes with the phase or does the advantage show more at really big sizes?

(4) support: IMO depends a lot of your dealer and your contact persons

[mjrp]

Firstly, congrats on the contract.

Secondly, I'd really appreciate your feel on the following -- I am a 35mm FF user (M240).  I've tested an S, and every time I look at its files on screen or printed (up to 50" wide at 300dpi on an inkjet) my immediate reaction is "wow, the S files are so much better than the M240".

With the S at large print sizes, I see crisper and "more immediate" details; far fewer lens aberrations; much smoother and less digitised look; files that resample more happily for huge prints; and especially i see much more 3D depth and feel I'm walking into the S prints.  It's almost as though a piece of plastic sheeting is in front of the M240 lens, but has been removed on the S!

I assume my constant response to preferring S files is due to (i) the S lenses are a clear step-up in image quality over M ones, and were designed specifically for a digital sensor (ie, the whole S chain was designed from the ground up as a digital system); (ii) larger sensor than 35mm FF; (iii) higher bit files; (iv) more megapixels.

So my question -- when you use the IQ260, and if you resample to a big print size -- do you think "wow, the IQ260 (with its higher megapixel count) is clearly different in image quality compared to the S" ...... or are the differences of IQ260 vs. S potentially much more subtle compared to my M240 vs. S response, given the S displays a lot of those typical MFD benefits anyway, just with fewer megapixels?

Many thanks.

Thanks Jon, it's a very lucrative contract, the only reason for me parting with the S.

 

In answer to your questions, it depends! We all see and want different things for our images so I can only call it as I see it, that said, in my opinion, any printing that you are doing at normal sizes, say up to 24", I don't think you will see a huge amount of image quality differences, I buy kit that gives me the look I want, rather than thinking that there will be any huge differences in quality of the print. The S lenses are just amazing and what I love about them is that the look is consistent which helps from a commercial view, I can shoot in a number of focal lengths and they all feel the same. The IQ260 has much more resolution, that appeals to me for a number of reasons, it's a big chip so my Rodenstock 32 is really made use of, also, there's no getting away from the fact that the detail you can see in a 60mp image is pretty amazing. But, I don't get that same look as I get with the S, I can make amazing 24" prints from a heavy crop with the 260, much better than a heavy crop from the S so that helps if you need that capability. The Rodenstock lenses are bitingly sharp, perfect for architecture and detail but I'm not going to use them to photograph a beautiful girl, shot wide open, that's not what they are for, the Leica though can do it all day long. I have just done some testing with the XF and 80mm of landscapes, at f8/f11 it is very sharp but still I don't feel it has that character, not yet anyway, I need to work with it some more.

 

I can honestly say that if I wasn't needing a tech cam for contracts then I'd not have bought the Phase, for me the S does what it's designed to do better than anything but that isn't always what you need. My advice is to go for what really appeals to you, trust your eyes, buy what you want and then forget about it, just take as many photographs as you can!

 

Hope that helps a little.

 

Mat

[erlingmm]

I can only speak as an enthusiast amateur, and for me the S007 is perfect.  If you need tech cam, 100 mpix etc., that is an entirely different league, and price point, and I understand and respect that for some this is a requirement.

 

I have had the whole series, started with the S2, upgraded to a (used) S006 which I really loved, but chose to upgrade to S007. Why? Let me call it "shooting envelope", or usage scenarios.

 

When I went from M to S, my biggest surprise was how vulnerable MF was to camera shake. I loved the S2 and S006, but in too many situations i did not get the necessary shutter speed to "get what I paid for". If you shoot too slow shutter, you won't get the ultimate quality from the camera. More Mpix will make the camera even more vulnerable for camera shake. With the S007 I can bump up the ISO to a level where i can get the right shutter speed without getting punished with noise because of high ISO.

 

This is also valid outdoors. A week ago ago i was at Pescadero Creek in California. Full daylight, but deep into forest with tall trees, and limited light. Even on ISO 400 I was down to 1/45 with the 24mm on the S007, in other situations (weddings ) i need even higher ISO.

 

The main argument for me for the S007 is the versatility, or the extended "shooting envelope". I shoot mainly without tripod (except landscapes, aurora borealis etc.). If you are a free-hand shooter, the higher ISO of the S007 greatly extends the usage envelope for the camera. 37,5 mpix is a compromise, I agree, but you don't shoot 100 mpix handheld, I think the S007 is optimal in resolution. With the fantastic optics (love the 24!) it gives you the MF look.

 

I have experienced none of the problems described above with the 100mm, it is actually my favourite walk-around.

[hhn360]

I can only speak as an enthusiast amateur, and for me the S007 is perfect.  If you need tech cam, 100 mpix etc., that is an entirely different league, and price point, and I understand and respect that for some this is a requirement.

 

I have had the whole series, started with the S2, upgraded to a (used) S006 which I really loved, but chose to upgrade to S007. Why? Let me call it "shooting envelope", or usage scenarios.

 

When I went from M to S, my biggest surprise was how vulnerable MF was to camera shake. I loved the S2 and S006, but in too many situations i did not get the necessary shutter speed to "get what I paid for". If you shoot too slow shutter, you won't get the ultimate quality from the camera. More Mpix will make the camera even more vulnerable for camera shake. With the S007 I can bump up the ISO to a level where i can get the right shutter speed without getting punished with noise because of high ISO.

 

This is also valid outdoors. A week ago ago i was at Pescadero Creek in California. Full daylight, but deep into forest with tall trees, and limited light. Even on ISO 400 I was down to 1/45 with the 24mm on the S007, in other situations (weddings ) i need even higher ISO.

 

The main argument for me for the S007 is the versatility, or the extended "shooting envelope". I shoot mainly without tripod (except landscapes, aurora borealis etc.). If you are a free-hand shooter, the higher ISO of the S007 greatly extends the usage envelope for the camera. 37,5 mpix is a compromise, I agree, but you don't shoot 100 mpix handheld, I think the S007 is optimal in resolution. With the fantastic optics (love the 24!) it gives you the MF look.

 

I have experienced none of the problems described above with the 100mm, it is actually my favourite walk-around.

 

 

Thank you very much for your feedback.

 

The IQ350 back is also CMOS so will have comparable ISO capabilities.  Without vibration reduction, which these cameras and lenses don't have, I do shoot with as high of a shutter speed as possible and also with a tripod or monopod.  I do agree that the S is more versatile though.  The ergonomics feels more like a large DSLR whereas the XF is rather boxy.

 

I think price isn't really an issue.  Both camera systems are quite expensive already.  They are going to run me $30-40k to get the kit I want, so at that level already, I'm not going to choose based on cost.  

[Paul J]

Thanks Jon, it's a very lucrative contract, the only reason for me parting with the S.

 

In answer to your questions, it depends! We all see and want different things for our images so I can only call it as I see it, that said, in my opinion, any printing that you are doing at normal sizes, say up to 24", I don't think you will see a huge amount of image quality differences, I buy kit that gives me the look I want, rather than thinking that there will be any huge differences in quality of the print. The S lenses are just amazing and what I love about them is that the look is consistent which helps from a commercial view, I can shoot in a number of focal lengths and they all feel the same. The IQ260 has much more resolution, that appeals to me for a number of reasons, it's a big chip so my Rodenstock 32 is really made use of, also, there's no getting away from the fact that the detail you can see in a 60mp image is pretty amazing. But, I don't get that same look as I get with the S, I can make amazing 24" prints from a heavy crop with the 260, much better than a heavy crop from the S so that helps if you need that capability. The Rodenstock lenses are bitingly sharp, perfect for architecture and detail but I'm not going to use them to photograph a beautiful girl, shot wide open, that's not what they are for, the Leica though can do it all day long. I have just done some testing with the XF and 80mm of landscapes, at f8/f11 it is very sharp but still I don't feel it has that character, not yet anyway, I need to work with it some more.

 

I can honestly say that if I wasn't needing a tech cam for contracts then I'd not have bought the Phase, for me the S does what it's designed to do better than anything but that isn't always what you need. My advice is to go for what really appeals to you, trust your eyes, buy what you want and then forget about it, just take as many photographs as you can!

 

Hope that helps a little.

 

Mat

Well said, this mirrors my own perspectives too. If it weren't for the fact that I needed the resolution I would not be keeping my Phase One, however the needs dictate the use in many instances and the resolution difference is quite considerable.

[erlingmm]

You want to know what the S is capable of (in the hands of a good photographer)? Sharp enough for you?

Check out this video (painful to watch) with Bruce Gilden and his American portraits:

[Jon Warwick]

For those of you in London, the similar style of portraits that Gilden took of people in the UK are now in the Barbican exhibition that has just started.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[hhn360]

Thanks everyone for your comments. 

 

I decided to go with the Phase One system for the following reasons: (1) image quality, (2) system expandability, (3) after-sales service - Digital Transitions in NYC which is the dealer for Phase One seems really good, (4) installed base of professional fashion photographers using this system, (5) faster sync speed, (6) commitment by Phase One to regular firmware upgrades.  As excellent as the S lenses are and how the S handles, I just don't get the sense that the user base is that established in the professional ranks, that after-sales service is as robust as compared to Phase One, and the overall flexibility and expandability of the S. 

 

Hien